Guest sillybear2 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 It's like a shark, it has to keep moving otherwise it dies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 It's like a shark, it has to keep moving otherwise it dies. Another fallacy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sillybear2 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 Another fallacy Capitalism is a fallacy B'Stard, you simply have an elite group of people exploiting everyone else to their own ends, it works pretty well at the moment and when that model breaks down you can always resort to bossing people around with the barrel of a gun. That's why debt doesn't matter; until it matters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minos Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 Capitalism is a fallacy B'Stard, you simply have an elite group of people exploiting everyone else to their own ends, it works pretty well at the moment and when that model breaks down you can always resort to bossing people around with the barrel of a gun. That's why debt doesn't matter; until it matters. These days the country is flooded with 'illegal' guns so it's anyone's guess who will end up doing the bossing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 (edited) Capitalism is a fallacy B'Stard, you simply have an elite group of people exploiting everyone else to their own ends, it works pretty well at the moment and when that model breaks down you can always resort to bossing people around with the barrel of a gun. That's why debt doesn't matter; until it matters. Why is capitalism a fallacy? You own capital - this is recognized and respected by the PTB. This is your property. You deploy your capital however you see fit. I think you are mistaking it for something else. Anyway I'm more interested in talking about sleeping sharks. Edited July 1, 2010 by Alan B'Stard MP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sillybear2 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 (edited) These days the country is flooded with 'illegal' guns so it's anyone's guess who will end up doing the bossing. Small arms are no match for Apache helicopter gunships and alike, you can lock down complete areas or intern troublesome people pretty quickly, there's already lists of people, you might be on one already. There's a good reason why the state is building a vast security apparatus, it happens whenever you get a huge gap between the rich and poor, the elites become paranoid, that's why anyone of any consequence in Brazil has to live behind high walls. Edited July 1, 2010 by sillybear2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sillybear2 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 Why is capitalism a fallacy? You own capital - this is recognized and respected by the PTB. This is your property. You deploy your capital however you see fit. Yeah, it's just a shame somebody came up with central banking, private FRB, fiat currency and screwed it all up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 (edited) Yeah, it's just a shame somebody came up with central banking, private FRB, fiat currency and screwed it all up. Of the four (you missed deposit insurance): Only 1 and 4 are aberrations. The other two are perfectly reasonable and will sustain themselves if sustainable - and will fail and re-balance the universe if not. 1 and 4 will just fail and ****** everything up. Edited July 1, 2010 by Alan B'Stard MP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scepticus Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 MMMmmmmm.... Government should be tolerated and not embraced. Give someone an inch and all that increased capacity does not necessarily translate to increased size. It translates to increased efficiency. we've tried the size thing, what is needed now is bang for the buck, and let me be quite clear - that does not mean simply dispensing with benefits and cutting corporation tax, which is the governmental equivalent of a debt funded private equity raid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scepticus Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 Only 1 and 4 are aberrations. remind me how a fiat currency operates without a central bank... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 remind me how a fiat currency operates without a central bank... The fiat part just says you can't pursue a debt through the judiciary if fiat is on deposit at the court for payment of the debt. Central bank is just there to add faith to the issuance of money by Government. Its additional function as lender of last resort is what invalidates it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 increased capacity does not necessarily translate to increased size. It translates to increased efficiency. we've tried the size thing, what is needed now is bang for the buck, and let me be quite clear - that does not mean simply dispensing with benefits and cutting corporation tax, which is the governmental equivalent of a debt funded private equity raid. I call capacity being the ratio of production vs cost of production. And increase in capacity is an increase in this ratio. You don't necessary have to produce anything - the capacity to do so just needs to be there. Nothing sure why are you bringing size into this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scepticus Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 The fiat part just says you can't pursue a debt through the judiciary if fiat is on deposit at the court for payment of the debt. what about tax? Central bank is just there to add faith to the issuance of money by Government. where do banks place their reserves without a central bank, given that fiat is by necessity a double entry book-keeping system? Its additional function as lender of last resort is what invalidates it. as per above, it also acts as the borrower of last restort, e.g. a place funds can always be deposited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scepticus Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 I call capacity being the ratio of production vs cost of production. And increase in capacity is an increase in this ratio. agreed, Nothing sure why are you bringing size into this? in response to your line about inches and miles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 (edited) what about tax? What about tax? It's about usage of the judiciary. The issuer of the fiat gets his seigniorage and everyone else gets on with it. where do banks place their reserves without a central bank, given that fiat is by necessity a double entry book-keeping system? Oh I believe in a clearing function of course - but anyone can do that. Preferably a state body. You just don't need to call it a bank. Edited July 1, 2010 by Alan B'Stard MP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sillybear2 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 what about tax? That's the only thing that gives fiat money any value, people have to go out and do real productive work in exchange for scraps of paper printed by the state, if they don't hand enough of them over then they will be beaten or locked up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 That's the only thing that gives fiat money any value No I disagree. You hold a debt. Someone offers you fiat in payment and you refuse. You have no recourse in the courts. No taxation involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sillybear2 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 No I disagree. You hold a debt. Someone offers you fiat in payment and you refuse. You have no recourse in the courts. No taxation involved. Enforcement of debts is part of it, but making people chase pieces of paper under duress is the crucial element. Try paying the tax man with seashells or turnips. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 (edited) Enforcement of debts is part of it, but making people chase pieces of paper under duress is the crucial element. Try paying the tax man with seashells or turnips. The tax man can tax you. He doesn't need bits of paper. He just needs a gaoler. Who does the tax valuation - you or the taxman? He might give you self-assessment to ease his workload but woe-betide if he doesn't agree. If anything fiat gives you a fairer chance at the hurdles with the taxman - and no need for a video linesman. Edited July 1, 2010 by Alan B'Stard MP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sillybear2 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 The tax man can tax you. He doesn't need bits of paper. He just needs a gaoler. The fiat is a means to an end, fail to gather enough at the end of the year and you're f***d, like a surf that doesn't come up with the harvest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 (edited) The fiat is a means to an end, fail to gather enough at the end of the year and you're f***d, like a surf that doesn't come up with the harvest. Tax men don't need fiat to tax. Remove fiat and they will still tax - just without the same efficiency or productivity. Do you have a jam jar at home marked 'taxman'? Does he send you a bill before you've done any work and received income? Removing fiat != removing taxation. Edited July 1, 2010 by Alan B'Stard MP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sillybear2 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 (edited) Tax men don't need fiat to tax. Remove fiat and they will still tax. Do you have a jam jar at home marked 'taxman'? Does he send you a bill before you've done any work? Yes, it's called council tax. Tax men don't need fiat to tax (but it helps, via printing), but fiat needs tax to operate effectively. It creates a natural demand for the fiat by giving it a special status. Edited July 1, 2010 by sillybear2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan B'Stard MP Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 (edited) Yes, it's called council tax. You pay council tax if you earn below a certain amount? Is this the same taxman that issues the currency? Edited July 1, 2010 by Alan B'Stard MP Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sillybear2 Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 You pay council tax if you earn below a certain amount? Of course, unless you live off the state. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scepticus Posted July 1, 2010 Share Posted July 1, 2010 What about tax? It's about usage of the judiciary. The issuer of the fiat gets his seigniorage and everyone else gets on with it. so you don't believe that fiat money only enjoys demand because the taxman is demanding it? Oh I believe in a clearing function of course - but anyone can do that. Preferably a state body. You just don't need to call it a bank. the government is a bank. Clearly since it can issue its own notes and debt, can take deposits (bonds) and effectively lends to taxpayers by providing services that are not entirely paid for right now, it fits the criteria of a fractional reserve bank. why not call a bank a bank? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.